When Mainers go the polls in November, they will decide whether a casino can be built in Oxford County. But this month, as 11 partisan gubernatorial candidates jockey for position for their June 8 primaries, the casino question sheds some light on their values and on the electorate’s values.
At a recent forum, Republican candidates Les Otten and Steve Abbott said they supported the Oxford County casino. Matt Jacobson said “maybe,” then “yes,” he supported it. Paul LePage said he was conflicted, but supported it. Candidates Peter Mills, Bill Beardsley and Bruce Poliquin all op-posed the idea.
At a forum in Machias, the Democratic candidates were asked not about the Oxford County referendum, but about the Passamaquoddy Tribe’s proposals for a casino in Washington County. Steve Rowe dismissed casinos as economic development. “There are better ways to stimulate the economy than gaming,” he said. Pat McGowan also panned the idea in favor of what he called sustainable jobs.
Libby Mitchell has supported the tribe’s casino efforts in the past, but said she will vote against the Oxford County proposal, saying it is not good economic development.
Rosa Scarcelli did not attend the Machias event, but said she opposes casinos because they fail to improve the economy and because “the people who can least afford it spend an inordinate amount of their income on them.”
Though the candidates will each cast one vote on the fall referendum like the rest of the electorate, one can infer values about larger issues from their views on the question.
Among those issues are the importance of quality of place. If Maine embraces one or more casinos, it may lose its cachet as the anti-Las Vegas, a place that eschews glitter and gambling for more traditional family and outdoor recreation.
Tied into the casino question is Maine’s relationship with its biggest industry, tourism. The Oxford County proposal and others before it have been cast as outdoorsy resorts in natural settings, with gambling just one amenity offered. Yet there is reasonable skepticism about that outdoorsy nature, which is likely to be little more than window dressing. A better question for candidates would seek their vision for growing tourism beyond the coast.
For some, the casino question gets to the heart of what they see as Maine’s hostility to new business. They feel Maine has too many hoops for businesses to jump through, and that candidates opposed to a casino are betraying an anti-entrepreneurial bias.
The approval of the huge Plum Creek resort and housing project for the Moosehead Lake region belies this view. A better question for candidates would be whether they see the Plum Creek project as a model for the future or a risky exploitation of resources.
Casinos also trigger the debate between the libertarian perspective and the view that government must protect people from their worst instincts.
The casino question is instructive for voters weighing the candidates, but follow-up questions about quality of place, tourism and development would reveal more.